Skip to main content

About your Search

20130113
20130121
STATION
CSPAN 23
LANGUAGE
English 23
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)
or the largest economy in the world. we need to get to the point of dealing with the biggest deficit in the country, the jobs deficit. to me, this bill simply put a band-aid on the problem. it did do something the president wanted to do, committed to do. he delivered on the promise to try to help protect the middle- class class. my theory is that in the next three political maneuvers that we are going to see coming up in congress, that people will start attacking the middle class. i believe this was our best opportunity to really take care long-term of the issues that we need to address to a balanced approach. >> to follow-up on that, you you voted early. you are not just waiting to see if it was going to pass and then vote no. the idea that obama kind of thatsome leverage theire, you wanted to see him fail, that he has to go back to the leverage -- that he does not have the leverage -- >> after the republicans walked away from the negotiations and tried the plan b by speaker boehner, it became clear, even after they tried to amend the senate yield that they could not do so dosh and
the opposite. record increases in spending, the biggest peacetime deficit in history, no effort to address entitlements which have grown significantly more challenging. wouldn't you call this that anti-clinton budget? >> no, i'm very proud of the work i did in the clinton administration and i point out one of the reasons spending was falling as a percentage of gdp was the economy was growing so fast because we had a good fiscal policy that promoted competent and economic growth. if you look at the projections today, we are projecting the retirement of the baby boom and we see more people claiming their benefits. >> i want to get to that projection. it is part of the reality that even if we cut spending in the policies we are making, as we pay the policies that are due, there are areas where spending goes up. i don't think any of us want to be saying people should not be able to collect social security benefits when they are 65. that and medicare for people who are retiring are driving aggregate spending levels. on the discretionary side, we are cutting spending. >> which is why we are baff
before, and have bid have a conversation on how we reduce our deficits further in a sensible way. -- i would have a conversation about how to reduce our deficits in a sensible way. we can talk about how we can make sure we finance our workers getting properly trained and are schools getting the education they deserve. there is a whole growth agenda that is important does well. -- as well. what you have not seen as the notion that has been presented so far by the republicans that deficit reduction will only cover spending cuts, that we will raise the debt ceiling dollar for dollar on spending cuts. there are a whole set of rules that have been established that are impossible to meet without doing severe damage to the economy. we're not going to put ourselves in a position where, in order to pay for the spending we have already incurred, where the two options are we were way to either profoundly hurt the economy, hurt seniors, hurt kids trying to go to college or we will blow up the economy. we will not do that. not whatever congress does. they will have to send me something that is sens
of savings from spending on health care and revenues from closing loopholes, we consult the deficit issue without sacrificing our investments in things like education that are going to help us grow. it turns out the american people agree with me. they listened to an entire year's debate over this issue, and they made a clear decision about the approach they prefer. they do not think it is fair to ask a senior to pay more for his or her health care or a scientist to shut down like that saving research so that a multi millionaire investor can take less in tax rates then a second trip -- and a secretary. they do not think it is smart to protect and as corporate loopholes and tax breaks for the wealthiest americans rather than rebuild roads and schools or help manufacturers bring jobs back to america. they want us to get our books in order in a balanced way where everyone pulls their weight, everyone does their part. that is what i want as well. that is what i have proposed. we can get it done, but we're going to have to make sure people are looking at this irresponsible way, rather than just
to reduce our deficit through a balanced mix of spending cuts and reforms to a tax code that at the time when we both came in was skewed in favor of the wealthy at the expense of middle class americans. when the history books are written, tim geithner is going to go down as one of our finest secretaries of the treasury. [applause] don't embarrass him. [laughter] on a personal note, he has been a wonderful friend and dependable advisor the out these last four years. there is an unofficial thing at treasury -- no peacocks commager, no winners. that would be a good saying for all of washington. few embody that ideal better than tim geithner. that is why when he was thinking about leaving a couple of years ago, i had to personally get on my knees with carol to help convince him to stay on a little bit longer. i could not be more grateful to carol and the entire family for letting him make
, if there is new changes in the next couple of decades, deficits will rise, the debt to gdp ratios will rise and our debt will become unsustainable. an important objective for policy is to bring the federal budget under control over the next few decades. as you know, we're still in a relatively fragile recovery and we want to avoid taking fiscal actions that will push the economy back into recession. that was one of the risks that the fiscal cliff pose. tax increases and spending cuts to that size, the cbo and others estimated that unemployment would rise and we very well might go back into a recession. so the challenge is to achieve long run sustainability without unduly hampering the recovery which we have. the deal that was struck, together with the previous work in 2011 that involved some spending cuts made some progress in both of these goals. on longer and sustainability, over the next decade or so, we have seen some movement toward stability in terms of the debt to gdp ratio. more work can be done, for sure. and then, on the short run, the fiscal cliff deal on new year's eliminated a
can't finish the job of deficit reduction through spending cuts alone. simply put, the president got his tax increases in the last congress. it's time for this congress to tackle washington's spending bing. i'd like to recognize the gentlelady from indiana. >> mr. chairman, my message otoday is simple. on too many big items, congress has been kicking the can down the road for years. it's time to supply real leadership on the most pressing challenges we face. this is the only way we can restore trust in congress. we're fast approaching a dead end. the social security trust fund will be bankrupt in 20 years. medicare and medicaid are not on a sustainable path. it is wrong for us to make proppingses to the american people we know we cannot keep. ms. brooks: we must address the drivers of our debt, medicare, medicaid, an social security. not because these programs don't have merit and certainly not because seniors currently benefiting from them don't deserve with they've been promised. because real leadership isn't about making the easy choice, it's about maybing the right choice. social
would be able to reduce the deficit by $150 billion. not a bad idea. and then if you could do all this and would only cost the average driver less than $1 per week per car, would that be a reasonable burden to impose? so i'm floating the idea. we are beginning discussions with senator mark warner of virginia. he was part of the gang of six, gang of eight. we are encouraged by what we're hearing from him. chairman bill shuster in the house came to our meeting in pittsburgh in november, and he said, listen, folks, we know that the central question congress will have to address next year is revenue. we are open to ideas. no guarantee that they can pass anything. but bill shuster is open to any and all ideas. so what i'm asking you to do is to join us in the battle that lies ahead this next couple of years and demand that congress provide long-term funding for transportation. you know, the big issue that every member of congress is concerned about is with deficits, long-term fiscal viability of the country and cutting spending and raising revenue, that combination is what people seem
reduced the federal deficit even by a dollar. we are not going to get out of this overnight. this would allow us to keep reducing the deficits. we have a shared value in eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. we are intent on that. host: how much of the budget does waste, fraud, and abuse make up? guest: i could go back to virginia beach, virginia, and we could identify waste every day. we will never eliminate it entirely. we can do a better job. it will take reforms. we are living longer and we have fewer people paying in. i want to protect those who are hurting the most, like art, who called in earlier. host: lester is a republican. caller: good morning. disability, 63 years old. my wife still works. $45,000 a less taw less than year. somehow someone is going to have to do something about this. guest: i agree completely. i believe it is immoral for one generation to pass on debt that dims their future. those who have served our country -- i am mindful of the price paid by our goldstar families. we're failing the young people. i am with you. i was over it. i believe when americans are gi
house caprettto prioritize the government's bills. guest: we have had some deficit reduction. as the president laid out a couple days ago, we have had over $2 trillion. we had 1.5 trillion that came from previous actions. and then we added just a few days ago some further deficit reductions through some increased taxes on the very wealthy of this country. so we have already begun to undertake a deficit-reduction. to use that as a reason to use the debt ceiling as a weapon is really playing with fire. they say pay some bills and not pay others. we have never tried that before. host: is it feasible? guest: i don't think so. which bills? social security? veterans? people out fighting for this country? which bills you pay? we never tried that. i think the president put it so well. this is not a dead beat nation, really. i think common sense is likely to prevail within the republican ranks. i know firsthand, second-hand, but much of the leadership within the house republican caucus, some of them realize the potential consequences. host: if president obama won on the fiscal cliff d
as our tax burden is, it has not kept pace with public spending. for decades we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children's future for the temporary convenience of the present. to continue this long trend is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals. you and i, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we're not bound by that same limitation? we must act today in order to preserve tomorrow. and let there be no misunderstanding -- we are going to begin to act, beginning today. [applause] the economic ills we suffer have come upon us over several decades. they will not go away in days, weeks, or months, but they will go away. they will go away because we as americans have the capacity now, as we've had in the past, to do whatever needs to be done to preserve this last and greatest bastion of freedom. in this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem. [applause] from t
in the late 1980's when we didn't have to talk about how to pay for disaster assistance because the deficit was only $3 trillion. but we've so badly mismanaged our money after that, by the time we got to hurricane katrina in 2005, that we actually did start talking about offsetting and paying for disaster relief and paid for and offset about 40% of it. but we didn't learn. we didn't learn from those mistakes and we've continued to mismanage our money and to run up our deficit to such a point now where we're at $16 trillion today and it's incumbent upon us to have the discussion about whether or not we have the money to do this. and whether or not it's important enough to us to pay for it. i wish very much that we weren't here today. i wish very much that we could pass this and easily borrow the money, without any questions whatsoever. but we've wasted that opportunity. we've mismanaged our own finances to the point where we are now no longer capable of taking care of our own. think about that for a second. in the united states of america we do not have enough money to take care of our own c
of these issues. >> if the deficit can only be resolved in increasing taxes and cutting expenses. what expenses would you cut? >> i don't believe we should cut across the board. we should cut strategically. s there -- there is fat, no question about it. i would start there. there is no question that this defense budget is bloated. i'm speaking -- i can tell you the mayors of the country want to see less spending on defense and more spending on bridges and roads and highways and schools. investments that will bear dwiveds down the line. i also said -- i'm a democrat and this does not fly with some democrats but you have to look at some entitlements. you can be for entilettlement reform and not want to turn health care into vouchers. i can tell you mayors have gotten the support of pension reform. there's a number of things we can do that don't decimate the safety net but do, you know, make the kinds of investments. a balanced approach is the only way to deal with deficits at the level and debt at the level that we have in the nation today. it is the only path forward. >> should president obama i
] [applause] >> former senators kent conrad and judd gregg lead a discussion on debt and deficit issues like it 8:30 a.m. here on c-span 2. at 1:00 p.m. eastern, new immigration legislation, live from the national press club on c-span 2. >> why did you write a book about your experience? >> it was an important part of history. i felt the fdic perspective should be brought to bear. there had been some other accounts of the crisis that i thought were not completely accurate, especially in terms of what we did and what i did so with the was important for a historical record to present our perspective and also, currently, for people to understand that there were different policy choices, a different policy options and disagreements and that if we want to prevent this crisis from happening again, i really felt the public themselves need to engage more in financial reform and educate themselves better and make it an issue with their elected officials. i wanted to make the book accessible and i had recommendations to help them do that. >> the former head of the federal deposit insurance corporation
to prioritize the government's bills. what's wrong with that idea? guest: we have had some deficit reduction. as the president laid out a couple days ago, we have had over $2 trillion. we had 1.5 trillion that came from previous actions. and then we added just a few days ago some further deficit reductions through some increased taxes on the very wealthy of this country. so we have already begun to undertake deficit reduction. to use that as a reason to use the debt ceiling as a weapon is really playing with fire. they say pay some bills and not pay others. we have never tried that before. host: is it feasible? guest: i don't think so. which bills? social security? veterans? people out fighting for this country? which bills do you pay? we never tried that. i think the president put it so well. this is not a deadbeat nation really, and i think common sense is likely to prevail within the republican ranks. i know, if i might say so, if not firsthand, secondhand, much of the leadership within the house republican caucus, not all of it, i think some realizes the potential consequences. host: if
this. yes, it may run up the immediate deficit, but once again, for every dollar that we invest in those levees we not only save lives and property, but we put people to work and we get the economic engine going. further up in my district, again, along the sacramento and the rivers, i have a project that's 44 miles of levee that clearly will fail. it has failed four times in the last 60 years. lives have been lost. one of the most catastrophic failures of a levee happened in this stretch of river. we need to rebuild that. the federal government's role in these construction projects of these levees has gone back to the very beginning of this nation and it is congress' task to allocate the money to decide the projects that are going to be built. but unfortunately we tied ourselves in knots here with certain rules that have been put in by our republican colleagues that prevent us from taking the necessary action to protect our communities. we're not talking about, you know, willy nily unnecessary projects. we're talking about saving -- nilly unnecessary projects. we're talking abou
our debt to g.d.p., our deficit to g.d.p. down around 3%, which is the basis of all economists left, right and center all agree on the areas we can begin to grow as a country. and as my grandfather used to say with grace of god and goodwill of the neighbors, cooler heads will prevail now between now and the time we deal with the debt ceiling and we may meet the goal which we set out to do, which is to have roughly a $4 trillion cut over 10 years in the long-term deficit and to put us on that path. but i didn't come here to talk about any of those important subjects today, because as important as they all are today we have a more urgent and immediate call and that is how to deal with the epidemic of gun violence in america. you all know the statistics better than anyone so i'm not going to repeat them. on that score, i owe an incredible debt of gratitude to you at the head table and those of you in the room. i know we don't have unanimity in this ballroom nor do we in any ballroom, but we all acknowledge that we have to do something. we have to act. and i hope we all agree, there is
they need to put inshunes on a gun like you do a car. host: so often we focus on the u.s. debt or deficit, we have exceeded now the dealt limit of $16.4 trillion. you can see in the upper left-hand side the debt clock. difficult choices on the debt if the u.s. think it's ceiling. the piece points out by mid february or early march the united states could face an unprecedented default unless it raises the debt ceiling. that was from tim geithner. further into the body of the "new york times" story i want to is share with you some of the numbers "the new york times" points out today. that could happen as early as february 15, if that happens by february 15 or early march, according to the by partisan policy center in analysis of what the government expects is $8 billion in revenue that day but it has $52 billion in spending that day, $6.8 billion in tax refunds, $3.5 in federal salaries, and $1.5 ode to military contractors and other commitments. consider again that day on february 15 f that is the day we reach the limit, the country would not have enough money to pay the bond holders let a
a fifth year in a row where we are going to have a deficit exceeding a trillion dollars a year. that's the greatest threat to the middle class in america and we are committed to trying to address that problem. that's one of the reasons why i voted against the fiscal cliff deal. the president called for a balanced approach. i think his approach raising taxes is not the way to grow our economy. nonetheless, he indicated there would be spending cuts. there were not. in fact there were spending increases in that bill. host: fix boxer's original assault gun ban. echoing a recent poll that said 30% of those polled are dissatisfied with gun laws, want to see them strengthened. not specific gun laws but, you know, saying we need to reinstitute the assault weapons ban and fix it. guest: well, the evidence -- again, we are certainly willing to listen to proposals that are offered by the president and his commission and by others, but the original assault weapons ban was not a meaningful law because it did not distinguish between the so-called assault weapon and other types of firearms that fir
. the problem is if you'd inadvertently did not disclose information, you are put out a credibility deficit with the public, and sometimes it is hard to get out of that, and it is difficult for or organizations to think about releasing the information before it is out for. -- asked for. i have been involved in several situations where the information was available and understandable. it mitigated some concerns. it was difficult to make that transparent, and catching up with that is really difficult. one reason for the impact was the lack of information as a baseline for understanding there had been a change. as a context for moving beyond the research done, what do you think the larger research agenda ought to be about? >> the hydrocarbons in the continental shelf and inland areas are pretty well known. it is the deep sea we did not have information for. i think the deep sea ecosystem is an area we need to emphasize, and some of the longer living organisms such as marine mammals. one of the issues is the effect of multiple stressors. we have some smart jury is that were heavily oiled, and s
to new gun laws. >> tomorrow, former senators conrad and grade lead a discussion on deficit issues. we will be live starting at 8:30 a.m. eastern on c-span to. and at 1:00 p.m. eastern, chamber of commerce president thomas downey year -- thomas donahue called for immigration legislation. we will be live from the national press club also on c- span to. -- c-span 2. >> he talked about the dream he had, he talked about for years, the american dream. it had been his dream. and he was in detroit a few months before. he talked about -- i have a dream that america will someday realize its principals in the declaration of independence. so i think he is just inspired by that moment. >> sunday, claiborne carson recalls his journey as a civil- rights activist, participating on the 1963 march on washington. it is part of three days of the tv this weekend, monday featuring authors and books on the inauguration. >> president obama officially launched his effort to reduce gun violence wednesday, calling for action in congress and signing 23 executive orders to deal with the issue. speaking before an
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)